Scientist at the Institute of John Q Public have determined that the cause of global warming has been attributed to one geographical area on Earth. That place is D.C. Scientist have found very telling evidence of a large output of hot gases emanating from the Capitol Building and the White House. Scientist conclude that the only way to reverse the trend is with one simple solution- throwout all the incumbents.

<quoted text>Yes, I could, but even if you could understand it, you would not accept it because you're a dogmatic ideologue. BTW, you've never asked me this incredibly lame diversionary question before, so why make it seem like I refused to answer?

That said, I do refuse .... precisely because it's an incredibly lame diversionary tactic to avoid your utter failure.

Can you post any actual science that supports your denial? Hmmm?

When I preheat my oven to 350 degrees Fahrenheit, I sometimes, not always but few times, found it made blocks of ice.

<quoted text>I did find it tedious that you repeated unsupported and ridiculously improbable CT (How did Gore corrupt every competent climate scientist into falsifying all of the published, peer-reviewed science and every national science academy on the planet?) while completely ignoring the openly available information regarding the origins and funding of denial.

See? You guys predicted back in the 70's that by the year 2000, there will be shortage of necessary metals for hospital equipment, food processing, life support, medicine, transportation, cooking, well being, survival, etc!

<quoted text>Political ideology has ZERO effect on validity of science. The subject of the thread is GW; all the infantile attempts to conflated your many distractions with the science are not only tiresome, they serve to show the vacuity of denier science.

Do you agree with banning asthma inhaler to kids to stop global warning?

Yes, No, or I am clueless!

A simple question deserves a simple answer, except when asked to a Liberal.

<quoted text>OK, so earth is being warmed by human activity.So why has the Minnesota winter been colder than normal?It's easy to claim the earth is burning up getting hotter each year then how can it magically cool down this year?

Overall, winters have warmed about two to four degrees in the past 30 years or so. One good way to measure it is to look at these number of subzero lows that we're seeing at night. There are distinct trends that are emerging in the past 30 to 40 years toward fewer subzero low temperatures in Minnesota and the Twin Cities.

Quick example: this year we've had five days so far, last year we had three. That's a very low number. If you go back to the 1970s - the whole decade - we had 444 subzero days. During the 1980s we had 280, during the 1990s we had 256; down to 198 in the 2000s. That's a 57% drop in those subzero nights. If you look at that overall the trend lines show we could be down to around 10 on average per winter. We used to average about 30 back in the '70s and we could be maybe closer to zero by 2040. By 2040, in the Twin Cities we could be very close to few or any subzero nights if our current climate trends continue.

<quoted text>Liberals destroy anyone who disagrees!Typical Liberal Standard operation procedure!If you guys spend more time doing real unbiased science work instead of spending 98% of your time attacking the objective scientists then the real numbers will show up.Global Warming Petition31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDshttp://www.petitionproject.org/GLOBAL WARMING IS A SOCIALIST HOAX

That petition has been long revealed for the denialist lie that it surely is:

The qualifications they used are so loose that millions who know nothing of climate and even precious little of science qualify. Thus, the seemingly impressive numbers represent ~0.1% of those "qualified".

Fields directly concerned with climate also failed in similar fashion. In fact, the number of climatoligists (if we can even believe this unvarified and unvarifiable list) is 39. Out of 31487. 39.

Go ahead and read the link, nut I fully expect you to refuse to process it and that you'll use this dishonest petition in the future. Such is the way of all deniers.

No, not at all. I posted that in response to your two phenomena rant about Obama being a secret Mooslim terrorist, etc. The only point worth making in the context of the discussion about the undeniability of GW is that such a post is an attempt at diversion, a sure sign of desperation, and a de facto concession, not to mention LOONY!

<quoted text>Stop calling me names and show me a non-Liberals scientists pro GW and I will listen.So far, every single GW alarmist being a socialists hack!

I don't expect you to support this bare assertion either, but I must ask you to provide evidence that somewhere between 97% and 99.9%(depending upon definitions of disagreement with the consensus view) are "socialist hacks".

As with your other implosion, failure to support your assertion is a concession.

<quoted text>"The warming trend will accelerate as seen already."But But But, THIS WINTER is below (COOLER) than normal in Minnesota...Do you have a logical response?BTW, you can take all your PHDs and remember they all have opinions just like everyone else.

Hey, all you nutters. Are you proud to associate yourselves with arguments like Ralph's? This is the third time he's made the retarded "it's cold somewhere now" argument AFTER being educated on its idiocy!

Then he equates millions of hours of scientific research, published and peer reviewed, with your uneducated opinions!

<quoted text>When I preheat my oven to 350 degrees Fahrenheit, I sometimes, not always but few times, found it made blocks of ice.I am planing to replace my ice dispenser for my oven.

You'll have to explain this bit of idiocy; I'm too rational to get inside the head of denier loons. Is it perhaps just a twist on Ralph's repeated failure to seperate weather from climate? Or is it a way of claiming that it's actually cooling without actually claiming it?(Because you know you can't defend it)

Hmmm? What the effect does your BS mean other than the already revealed desperate attempt to evade -

I already told you at least twice that I’m a conservative libertarian acceptor of science.

martinezjosei wrote:

<quoted text>Can you show me a real conservative who is also an GW alarmist?

I’m a real conservative acceptor of science. So were some of the GOP presidential contenders until the primary battle in which the anti-science rubes dominated.

martinezjosei wrote:

<quoted text>What happened to the year 2,000 mass hunger you guys predicted?

Who are "my guys"? You don't make sense. But right now, I don’t care because it has nothing to do with climate science. You’re evading.

martinezjosei wrote:

<quoted text>Who was right? We Conservatives were right as always!

Oh, I understand now. Apparently, you’re not just so irrational that you can’t detect the difference between science and politics; you seem to think that “conservative” is the antonym of “scientist”. Your concession is accepted.

Now let's see what your evasions were evading. Your non-response was to this:

"I did find it tedious that you repeated unsupported and ridiculously improbable CT (How did Gore corrupt every competent climate scientist into falsifying all of the published, peer-reviewed science and every national science academy on the planet?) while completely ignoring the openly available information regarding the origins and funding of denial.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.